lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 1839
Report #1839 Skillset: Nekotai Skill: Angknek Org: Glomdoring Status: Finalised Problem: Presently, Angknek does damaged legs as an arm attack in base stance. This allows a nekotai to break both legs in a single, repeatable combo over and over again for an unnecessary amount of hindering and damage. Traditionally, this has been justified by the fact that Nekotai have the worst access to mutilated limbs out of every monk class. This report aims to complete the process started in Report 1787 by giving Nekotai removing the now unnecessary base stance double leg breaking while introducing reasonable access to leg mutilates. 2 R: 2 Solution #1: Change Sprongma to inflict DamagedLegs on leg strikes. Change Angknek to afflict paralysis on leg strikes rather than damaged legs. 2 R: 2 Solution #2: As solution 1, but haemophilia instead of paralysis for angknek. 2 R: 2 Solution #3: In addition to either of the above, swap the leg effects of Angkai (Disloyalty) and Angkhai (DamagedLeg), so that nekotai retain the ability to break legs pre-Surge. Player Comments: ---on 2/8 @ 17:06 writes: For reference, the Nekotai route to Mutilate would be (any grapple, sprongma+oriama) after this report. Oriama is a surge+ grapple ender which mutilates damaged limbs and damages non-damaged limbs. ---on 2/8 @ 17:06 writes: For further reference, the Shofangi mutilate is (any grapple, snap+buck), the Nunchaku mutilate is (any grapple, tannaku+ganzhou) and the Tessenchi version is (any grapple, inertialkick+falsepositive); all of these are a grapple followed by a grapple ender in surge+. The Tahtetso version raktiah'sho+raktiah'sho+any kick) and the Ninjakari version (ninombhi+ninombhi+any kick) are also surge+ only, but do not involve a grapple ender and therefore do not need the grapple for setup. ---on 3/8 @ 02:42 sets as pending ---on 3/9 @ 03:35 writes: As a note report 1849 is asking for double limb breaks for Tessenchi from base. It may be a good idea to agree upon a common standard of affliction for monks because right now we've one report in asking for 2x limb breaks from base and one report saying 2x limb breaks from base is too much. Doesn't really make sense to give it to one while taking it from another. ---on 3/9 @ 17:07 writes: While I agree to an extent that consensus on early limb breaks is good, remember that 1849 is based on a far more limited design space because of how Tessenchi are set up - The only feasible alternate aff stack is ice and to divorce reliance from vitals means the ice affs have to be on limbs. Short of adding new affs, that leaves limited options. I also think that the desire for consensus conflicts with the differentiation in monk specs. We have unequal access to many things - prones, mutilates, etc - as a matter of design, so overly enforcing sameness without regard for each spec makes no sense to me. My main direct concern about this report is Sol3, doesn't that remove access to a Neko hemorrhaging aff (disloyalty?) or am I misremembering? ---on 3/9 @ 21:43 writes: Ejderha: Nekotai would indeed no longer be able to give Disloyalty as a direct affliction, but given that Angkai already has DamagedOrgans as part of the same action, meaning that we can use Hadrudin instead, just as we currently do with Mellitin for Dysentery. As you rightfully point out, different monk specializations are different. Nekotai in particular is a very poisons-focused design, getting multiple abilities to hide poisons, ignore shrugging and gain additional poison applications. ---on 3/10 @ 12:07 writes: Based on further discussion I'm opposing this report on the same basis that we supported report 1849. I agreed that Tessenchi getting limb breaks at base was fine, and from the votes in 1849 it looks like the majority of envoys supported that too. Not a single envoy voted against or had an issue with Tessenchi getting double damage limbs, the justification in discussions being that stancing was strong enough to deal with it. I can understand a blanket statement saying remove limb breaks from base onwards but I cant understand a double standard where you can vote for giving double limb breaks to one monk but feel the need to remove it from a second. ---on 3/13 @ 12:39 writes: Changed solution 3 not to remove disloyalty; it instead simply moves it to surge ---on 3/21 @ 15:04 writes: Would expect to see this vote rejected by the same people who supported solution 1 and 2 on report 1849. REPORT 1849 VOTES ---on 3/21 @ 19:08 writes: @Deichtine: I think your expectation is based on false equivalence. Those reports are regarding different issues, for different specs, with severely different constraints and kill conditions. Suggesting that votes must be the same is unreasonable. Moi says double damaged legs at base is 'unnecessary' due to other changes. You have not at all refuted the claims in the report. Which is from your own org. Solution 1 seems to maintain the idea of holding in place, but I think solution 2 would be fine. I don't think I would want Solution 3 as Nekotai, pushing access to a hemo aff to a future stance, but I don't see that it would be obviously OP, certainly 'better' than the status quo and a potential compromise.